Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750842AbWINPjt (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Sep 2006 11:39:49 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750871AbWINPjs (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Sep 2006 11:39:48 -0400 Received: from e34.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.152]:13729 "EHLO e34.co.us.ibm.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750840AbWINPjr (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Sep 2006 11:39:47 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20060914103037.GB19959@ms2.inr.ac.ru> To: Alexey Kuznetsov Cc: Jeff Layton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH] make ipv4 multicast packets only get delivered to sockets that are joined to group X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 7.0 HF144 February 01, 2006 Message-ID: From: David Stevens Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2006 08:39:39 -0700 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on D03NM121/03/M/IBM(Release 7.0.1HF269 | June 22, 2006) at 09/14/2006 09:39:42, Serialize complete at 09/14/2006 09:39:42 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1631 Lines: 40 Alexey Kuznetsov wrote on 09/14/2006 03:30:37 AM: > Hello! > > > No, it returns 1 (allow) if there are no filters to explicitly > > filter it. I wrote that code. :-) > > I see. It did not behave this way old times. > > From your mails I understood that current behaviour matches another > implementations (BSD whatever), is it true? Hi, Alexey, If you mean IPv6 code in current BSD derivatives, I don't know. The IPv6 behaviour was different from IPv4 on Linux and was changed for compatibility with IPv4 (discussion on netdev agreed that binding should determine socket delivery, not group membership, or simply that there was no reason to be different from long-standing IPv4 practice). The IPv4 code is that way for compatibility with everything else since about ~4.3BSD (with the possible exception of Solaris 8, apparently). FWIW, I think Deering's original interpretation is correct. Adding a multicast address to an interface by joining a group is little different from adding a unicast address via SIOCSIFADDR, which certainly does affect packets delivered to the machine and to any INADDR_ANY-bound socket. Binding to the multicast address and not INADDR_ANY will give you only packets for that group, if that's what you want, just as in the unicast address-specific bind. +-DLS - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/